PBShttp://www.desmogblog.com/taxonomy/term/10180/all
enClimate Skeptic Attacks PBS For Not Reporting Irrelevant Informationhttp://www.desmogblog.com/2012/09/25/climate-skeptic-attacks-pbs-not-reporting-irrelevant-information
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/head_in_the_sand.jpg?itok=Y9n0o1cf" width="200" height="133" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Recently, <a href="http://desmogblog.com/2012/09/18/petroleum-broadcasting-system-s-newshour-and-merchants-climate-doubt"><span class="caps">PBS</span> found itself on the wrong side of the climate change discussion</a>, when it <a href="http://desmogblog.com/2012/09/17/pbs-falls-fair-and-balanced-trap-airs-one-sided-interview-climate-skeptic">chose to air a one-sided, misinformation-laden interview</a> with climate skeptic Anthony Watts. During the interview for <span class="caps">PBS</span>’s Newshour, no attempt was made to air a differing opinion from a credible source, leaving Watts’ incorrect statements to be aired unchallenged.</p>
<p>Perhaps in an attempt to “balance” their one-sided interview with Watts, last week <a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/science/july-dec12/icemelt_09-20.html">Newshour aired a segment</a> titled “<a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/science/july-dec12/icemelt_09-20.html">Arctic Icecap Shrinks to Record Low Level</a>,” in which Walt Meier from the National Snow and Ice Data Center discussed the implications, dangers, and causes of the Arctic ice melt. These causes and <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/25/opinion/boelman-arctic-tundra/index.html">concerns</a> have been documented in <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rocky-kistner/dwindling-arctic-ice-sign_b_1905212.html">studies and articles</a> all across the world, so there is no room for debate on this issue when the facts clearly show that the arctic ice caps are melting at a record.</p>
<p>But apparently for climate skeptics, one one-sided story isn’t enough to keep them happy for very long, and they have now decided to attack <span class="caps">PBS</span> for ignoring their talking points about melting polar ice caps.</p>
<!--break-->
<p>Leading the charge against <span class="caps">PBS</span> is noted <a href="http://heartland.org/steve-goreham">climate skeptic and Heartland Institute</a> “expert” <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steve-goreham">Steve Goreham</a>, who tells us that Arctic ice melting isn’t a cause for concern because there’s so little ice in the arctic that it won’t make a “<a href="http://www.climatism.net/facts-about-global-warming/#icecap_melting">measurable difference</a>” if it all melts. But more importantly, Goreham tells us that <span class="caps">PBS</span> ignored the “elephant in the room” by not reporting on how the Antarctic ice sheet is actually expanding.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.climatism.net/facts-about-global-warming/#icecap_melting">Goreham’s own words</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…<span class="caps">PBS</span> and Dr. Meier have ignored the elephant in the room. The elephant is the Antarctic Icecap. While satellite data shows that Arctic ice has been declining for the last 30 years, the same satellite data shows that Antarctic ice has been expanding for the last 30 years.</p>
<p>It’s interesting that climate scientists are so alarmed by declining Arctic ice. The Arctic Icecap is only 1‒2 percent of Earth’s ice, while the elephant, the Antarctic Icecap, contains about 90 percent of Earth’s ice. The climate models underestimated the decline in Arctic ice, but they are confounded by the growth in Antarctic ice. Data from Dr. Meier’s own National Snow and Ice Center shows that the extent of Antarctic sea ice for 2012 is greater than the 1979-2000 average. I wonder why he didn’t mention the good news about Antarctic ice on the <span class="caps">PBS</span> segment.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If Goreham is honestly wondering why the issue of “Antarctic ice expansion” wasn’t brought up in the <span class="caps">PBS</span> segment, the answer is obvious: Antarctic ice has nothing to do with Arctic ice. It’s the old “apples to oranges” comparison.</p>
<p>Climate scientists have long told us that Arctic ice would be the first to go as a result of climate change. And there are several reasons for that. <a href="http://www.livescience.com/23333-antarctic-sea-ice-global-warming.html?cid=co3847584">Natalie Wolchover of LiveScience explains it best</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
But if anyone had asked an actual scientist, they would have learned that a good year for sea ice in the Antarctic in no way nullifies the precipitous drop in Arctic sea-ice levels year after year — or the mounds of other evidence indicating global warming is really happening.<br /><br />
“Antarctic sea ice hasn't seen these big reductions we've seen in the Arctic. This is not a surprise to us,” said climate scientist Mark Serreze, director of the <span class="caps">NSIDC</span>.<br /><br />
“Some of the skeptics say 'Well, everything is <span class="caps">OK</span> because the big changes in the Arctic are essentially balanced by what's happening in the Antarctic.' This is simply not true.”<br /><br />
Projections made from climate models all predict that global warming should impact Arctic sea ice first and most intensely, Serreze said. “We have known for many years that as the Earth started to warm up, the effects would be seen first in the Arctic and not the Antarctic.<br /><br />
The physical geography of the two hemispheres is very different. Largely as a result of that, they behave very differently.”<br /><br />
The Arctic, an ocean surrounded by land, responds much more directly to changes in air and sea-surface temperatures than Antarctica, Serreze explained.<br /><br />
The climate of Antarctica, land surrounded by ocean, is governed much more by wind and ocean currents.<br /><br />
Some studies indicate climate change has strengthened westerly winds in the Southern Hemisphere, and because wind has a cooling effect, scientists say this partly accounts for the marginal increase in sea ice levels that have been observed in the Antarctic in recent decades.<br />
</blockquote>
<p>So, <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/thick-melt.html">according to actual climate scientists</a>, not only are the two unrelated, but the increase in Antarctic ice can actually be attributed to climate change. Goreham’s own talking points are therefore debunked by his own data.</p>
<p>But what Goreham is really trying to do is misdirect the public. He believes that distracting the public with a different issue will draw attention away from the real issue. This practice is all too common in both the media and politics, and is a tried and true <span class="caps">PR</span> tactic.</p>
<p>And here’s more on the <a href="http://www.climatism.net/facts-about-global-warming/#icecap_melting">non-issue of Arctic ice melts</a> from his website:</p>
<blockquote>
But, Arctic ice is floating in the Arctic Ocean. Even if all of it melts, sea levels would not rise by a measurable amount. In addition, Arctic ice has expanded and receded many times in history due to natural causes.</blockquote>
<p>Goreham isn’t a skeptic in the sense that he believes climate change is a hoax, but he is a firm believer that the activities of human beings have nothing to do with climate change. His quote above shows us that he’s a member of the “cyclical climate change” crowd – a crowd that chooses to bury its head in the sand and pretend the problem isn’t the result of our activities.</p>
<p><br />
There is ample evidence that tells us that A<a href="http://grist.org/news/at-least-70-percent-of-arctic-ice-loss-is-due-to-climate-change/">rctic ice melt is not cyclical</a>, but the result of human activities that have spurred on climate change. But as long as there is dirty energy industry money to fund think tanks and deniers like Heartland and Goreham, there will always be misinformation to tell us that the scientists are wrong.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6745">Steve Goreham</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10180">PBS</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10334">Newshour</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/939">climate change</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/946">arctic</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4511">ice</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/947">antarctic</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9259">melt</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10335">Increase</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6746">Climatism</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/821">Heartland Institute</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5881">Emission</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6406">Carbon</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4419">sea level</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7714">Scientist</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5157">media</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7148">Misinformation</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10336">Misdirection</a></div></div></div>Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:00:50 +0000Farron Cousins6545 at http://www.desmogblog.comPetroleum Broadcasting System's "Newshour" and the Merchants of Climate Doubthttp://www.desmogblog.com/2012/09/18/petroleum-broadcasting-system-s-newshour-and-merchants-climate-doubt
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/newshour_watts_denial.png?itok=cwm8nx11" width="200" height="188" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>There's an old <a href="http://www.quotes.net/quote/2662">German proverb</a> that goes, “Whose bread I eat his song I sing.”</p>
<p>Enter a recent spate of reportage by the Public Broadcasting System's (<span class="caps">PBS</span>)<em> ”</em>Newshour<em>.”</em> In a September 17 story titled, “<a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/09/why-the-global-warming-crowd-oversells-its-message.html">Climate Change Skeptic Says Global Warming Crowd Oversells Its Message</a>” (with a <span class="caps">URL</span> titled, “<a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/09/why-the-global-warming-crowd-oversells-its-message.html">Why the Global Warming Crowd Oversells its Message</a>”) the Newshour “provided an unchecked platform for Anthony Watts, a virulent climate change denier funded by the Heartland Institute,” <a href="http://act.engagementlab.org/sign/climate_pbs_watts/">as described</a> by <em><a href="http://forecastthefacts.org/about/">Forecast the Facts</a>.</em></p>
<p><em>Forecast the Facts</em> created <a href="http://act.engagementlab.org/sign/climate_pbs_watts/">a petition</a> demanding that the “<span class="caps">PBS</span> ombudsman…immediately investigate how this segment came to be aired,” <a href="http://act.engagementlab.org/sign/climate_pbs_watts/">stating that</a>, “This is the kind of reporting we expect from Fox News, not <span class="caps">PBS</span>.”</p>
<p>Very true, this is exactly the type of reporting <a href="http://www.outfoxed.org/">we've come to expect out of Rupert Murdoch's Fox News</a>, a cable “news” network that <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fox_News">provides a voice for right-wing propagandists</a> on all policy issues, including <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/11/18/372313/yes-virginia-fox-news-lies-about-climate-change/?mobile=nc">climate change denial</a>. But perhaps expectations are too high for <em><span class="caps">PBS</span></em>' “Newshour” and we should've expected exactly what we got: a friendly platform for the climate change denying <a href="http://www.merchantsofdoubt.org/">merchants of doubt</a>. </p>
<p>What's at play here goes above and beyond a single bad story by “Newshour.” Rather, it's a small piece and the result of an aggressive campaign that's been going on for nearly two decades to destroy public television in the public interest.</p>
<p>Based on the shift in how the “Newshour” has funded itself over the years, it's evident that the once-esteemed ”<a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/aboutus/history.html">MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour</a>” streamed on the Public Broadcasting System has transformed <span class="caps">PBS</span> into what investigative reporter Greg Palast calls the “<a href="http://www.gregpalast.com/the-petroleum-broadcast-systemowes-us-an-apology/">Petroleum Broadcasting System</a>.”</p>
<!--break-->
<h3>
“Petroleum Broadcasting System” Sponsored by Chevron, Koch Industries, ExxonMobil, Et Al </h3>
<p>In an October 2010 story, Palast pointed out that the “Newshour” is <a href="http://www.gregpalast.com/the-petroleum-broadcast-systemowes-us-an-apology/">funded by Chevron</a> in critiquing its softball coverage of the <span class="caps">BP</span> oil disaster. This led him to refer to <span class="caps">PBS</span> as the “<a href="http://www.gregpalast.com/the-petroleum-broadcast-systemowes-us-an-apology/">Petroleum Broadcasting System</a>.”</p>
<p>Above and beyond funding from Chevron, “Newshour” also lists Burlington Northern Santa Fe (<span class="caps">BNSF</span>), owned by Warren Buffett under the auspices of Berkshire Hathaway, as a <a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/aboutus/">sponsor</a>. As previously reported here on DeSmog, <span class="caps">BNSF</span> - the second largest freight rail company in the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> behind Union Pacific - is a <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/warren-buffett-exposed-oracle-omaha-and-tar-sands">major transporter of tar sands infrastucture</a> to the Alberta tar sands. It's also a major mover of <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/b-c-protest-saturday-stop-warren-buffett-s-bnsf-coal-trains">coal being sent to coastal terminals</a> and exported to Asia.</p>
<p><span class="caps">BNSF</span> also <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/print-edition/2012/06/22/bnsf-railway-co-inks-deal-with-us.html?page=all">inked a deal</a> in June 2012 with <a href="http://www.ussilica.com/about"><span class="caps">U.S.</span> Silica Holdings Inc.</a> to “build and run a major warehousing operation…to store sand destined for the Eagle Ford Shale.” The Texas-based <a href="http://www.chron.com/business/article/Eagle-Ford-a-contender-for-top-U-S-play-3742422.php">Eagle Ford Shale basin</a>, like all shale basins, requires vast amounts of fracking sand (aka sillica sand) in order to tap into the gas located deep within the shale reservoir. This sand predominantly comes from western Wisconsin's “<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sand-land-frac-sand-mining-western-wisconsin-video-report-desmogblog">sand land</a>,” as we explained in a recent short documentary.</p>
<p>The <em>San Antonio Business Journal</em> <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/print-edition/2012/06/22/bnsf-railway-co-inks-deal-with-us.html?page=all">explained the situation in-depth</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The proposed facility, scheduled to open in early 2013, will be constructed on 290 acres of land the railroad purchased late last year. It will be able to store up to 15,000 tons of sand used by drillers during the hydraulic fracturing process to release oil and gas from dense shale rock.</p>
<p>The Fort Worth-based railway will haul up to 40,000 tons of silica sand and other products per month to San Antonio from <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Silica operations in Ottawa, Ill., and Rochelle, Ill.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>To top it off, Buffett himself has major personal investments in Big Oil, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/warren-buffett-exposed-oracle-omaha-and-tar-sands">as we've written about on DeSmog</a>. As of August 2011, he owned 29.1 million shares of stock in ConocoPhillips, 421,800 shares of stock in ExxonMobil, and 7.777 million shares of stock in General Electric, all three of which are involved in various aspects of the tar sands extraction industry and the shale gas extraction industry.</p>
<p>In sum, <span class="caps">BNSF</span> is cashing in big time from the shale gas boom, the tar sands boom, and the coal export boom. </p>
<p>Koch Industries - a <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-institute-manifestation-kochtopus-empire">major Heartland Institute funder and key behind its founding</a> - has also funded <span class="caps">PBS</span>' “<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2010/09/07/206688/pbs-ombudsman-michael-getler-whitewashes-the-koch-funded-greenwashing-episode-of-nova-that-whitewashes-the-threat-of-human-caused-climate-change/">Nova</a>” to the tune of $7 million. ExxonMobil <a href="http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/03/exxonmobil-resumes-its-pbs-sponsorship/">has also provided funds </a>to <span class="caps">PBS</span>' “Nova,” “Nightly Business Report” and “Masterpiece Theatre.” Both <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/maps.php">ExxonMobil</a> and <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/polluterwatch/koch-industries/">Koch Industries</a> are among the top funders of the climate change denial machine.</p>
<h3>
The Plan: Cut Public Funding, Make <span class="caps">PBS</span> Rely on Fossil Fuel Industry Money</h3>
<p>Looking at the situation more broadly, it's important to understand that <span class="caps">PBS</span> didn't <em>always</em> rely on fossil fuel industry largesse to keep itself afloat.</p>
<p>Rather, over the past two decades, <span class="caps">PBS</span> has been <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/02/15-9">under attack by the Republican Party</a>, with constant threats and a coordinated campaign to defund a network originally set up to be a public educational service via the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Broadcasting_Act_of_1967">Public Broadcasting Act of 1967</a>.</p>
<p>As explained in a <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/02/15-9">February 2011 <em><span class="caps">ABC</span> News</em> story</a>,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>One of Newt Gingrich's first acts as speaker of the House in 1995 was to call for the elimination of federal funding for <span class="caps">CPB</span>, and for the privatization of public broadcasting. Neither attempt was successful, though it did keep the hot-button issue in the limelight for years. </p>
<p>During the early 2011 budget debates, <em><span class="caps">ABC</span> </em>explained that “The House Republicans' budget would rescind any funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting – which partially supports these two organizations – for the remainder of the year, and zero out millions in funds after that.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>President Barack Obama joined in on the attack on public television with his “bipartisan deficit commission” – referred to as the “<a href="http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/08/26/dear-president-obama-time-to-can-the-catfood-commission/">Catfood Commission</a>” by <em>FireDogLake</em> – calling for “eliminating funding for the <span class="caps">CPB</span>, estimating that it would save the government $500 million in 2015,” <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/02/15-9"><em><span class="caps">ABC</span> </em>explained</a>. His Republican Party opponent for the 2012 presidential race, Mitt Romney, has also <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/15/mitt-romney-tax-cuts_n_1778429.html">called for the defunding of <span class="caps">PBS</span></a>.</p>
<p>Private funding of what was originally supposed to be a publicly-funded television station comes with its own agenda. This agenda departs from the <a href="http://www.cpb.org/aboutpb/act/PublicBroadcastingAct1967.pdf">mission set out by the 1967 Act</a>, which deemed it “in the public interest to encourage the growth and development of public…television broadcasting, including the use of such media for instructional, educational, and cultural purposes” and said it “should be created…to afford maximum protection from extraneous interference and control.”</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/19/business/media/19newshour.html"><em>The New York Times</em> said it best</a> in a May 2008 story: benevolent corporate underwriting of public television is “increasingly out of step with the…needs of corporations” as they don't “sponsor public television programs for purely philanthropic reasons.”</p>
<h3>
Plenty of Money for <span class="caps">PSYOP</span>s Campaigns Abroad</h3>
<p>Even <span class="caps">PBS</span> President Paula Kerger has internalized the message that the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> government is “broke,” <a href="http://www.current.org/2012/07/house-labor-hhs-proposal-would-slash-pubcasting-funding-zero-it-out-in-fy15/">stating</a> after the latest attempt to defund <span class="caps">NPR</span> by House Republicans, “While we understand the many difficult decisions appropriators must make and that the nation is facing challenging economic times, if enacted, such drastic cuts in federal funding could have a devastating effect on public television stations.”</p>
<p>Far from being strapped for cash, though, the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> government has plenty of money to spend on overseas psychological operations (<span class="caps">PSYOP</span>s) campaigns around the world of the sort <a href="http://desmogblog.com/gas-fracking-industry-using-military-psychological-warfare-tactics-and-personnel-u-s-communities">covered by DeSmog</a> during the <a href="http://truth-out.org/news/item/7153:fracking-and-psychological-operations-empire-comes-home">shale gas industry's <span class="caps">PSYOP</span>s revelation</a> of November 2011.<br /><br />
Media scholar Bob McChesney <a href="http://www.democracynow.org/2011/3/7/as_public_broadcasting_and_community_media">explained this phenomenon</a> in a March 2011 <em>Democracy Now! </em>appearance, during the middle of the previous round of <span class="caps">PBS</span> funding cuts debate in the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> House of Representatives:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>You know, currently the United States spends roughly twice as much money bankrolling international broadcasting — Voice of America and the various Radio Martís and things like that — than it does paying for domestic public broadcasting and community broadcasting, roughly twice as much — $750 million, roughly, last year. And the idea of raising that and putting more propaganda out to sort of enhance the view of the United States vis-à-vis other nations of the world is entirely the wrong way to go. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>That $750 million is more than the $500 President Obama said the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> could save by slashing publicly-funded media. In leiu of public funding, American citizens are being shafted with fossil fuel-funded disinformation here at home, while subsidizing it with their tax dollars abroad. </p>
<p>Unless we see big changes in funding for public television, it'll continue to be a standard operating procedure for outlets like <span class="caps">PBS</span> to transform into iterations of the newfangled “Petroleum Broadcasting System” - and to end where we began - play the game of “Whose bread I eat his song I sing.”</p>
<p><strong>Image Credit</strong>: <em><a href="http://act.engagementlab.org/sign/climate_pbs_watts/">Forecast the Facts</a></em></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8218">Forecast the Facts</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9289">Sand Land</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9264">Frac Sand</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10199">coal export boom</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9267">Shale Gas Boom</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10200">tar sands boom</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10216">Radio Marti</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10202">Catfood Commission</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3350">Anthony Watts</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5081">Merchants of Doubt</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5075">BP oil spill</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/657">ExxonMobil</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10203">U.S. Silica Holdings Inc.</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10204">San Antonio Business Journal</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1270">Newt Gingrich</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/850">abc news</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2632">tar sands</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/oil-sands">oil sands</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5565">shale gas</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7277">shale oil</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7759">Eagle Ford Shale</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7461">Warren Buffett</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10205">FireDogLake</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10206">Corporation for Public Broadcasting</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4103">republican party</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7666">psyops</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8901">Psychological Operations</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7650">psychological warfare</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10207">DeSmogBlog PSYOPs</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10208">DeSmogBlog Psychological Operations</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8958">coal exports</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10209">Coal Exports Asia</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/general-electric">General electric</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5127">conocophillips</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/chevron">chevron</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8244">BNSF</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2509">alberta tar sands</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10210">Berkshire Northern Santa Fe</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8765">President Barack Obama</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2257">mitt romney</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/821">Heartland Institute</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/rupert-murdoch">rupert murdoch</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/627">Fox News</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7463">Berkshire Hathaway</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8265">Union Pacific</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10211">Freight Rail Fossil Fuel Transport</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8662">Greg Palast</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10212">MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10213">Petroleum Broadcasting System</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10214">Bob McChesney</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9856">Democracy Now!</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10215">Voice of America</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10217">Public Broadcasting System</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10180">PBS</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10218">Whose bread I eat his song I sing</a></div></div></div>Wed, 19 Sep 2012 18:14:25 +0000Steve Horn6528 at http://www.desmogblog.comPBS NewsHour Falls Into “Balance” Trap, Provides Megaphone For Anthony Watts http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/09/17/pbs-falls-fair-and-balanced-trap-airs-one-sided-interview-climate-skeptic
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/PBS.jpg?itok=kgI2sUVB" width="200" height="112" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><span class="caps">PBS</span> – the network that <a href="http://www.theprogressiveprofessor.com/?p=13595">conservatives have regularly attacked</a> for “liberal bias” for more than 40 years – finally put that myth to rest tonight by airing a one-sided interview with climate change denier <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/anthony-watts">Anthony Watts</a>. The former weatherman-turned business owner and blogger Watts, was given close to ten minutes of uncontested airtime to spout his disinformation about climate change, without any retorts from actual climate scientists.<br /><br /><strong>Update:</strong> <a href="http://forecastthefacts.org/">Forecast The Facts</a> launched a <a href="http://act.engagementlab.org/sign/climate_pbs_watts/">petition calling for <span class="caps">PBS</span> Ombudsman Michael Getler to investigate</a> whether the segment met <span class="caps">PBS</span>' standards.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/09/why-the-global-warming-crowd-oversells-its-message.html">Watts freely admitted in the interview</a> that he is not a climate scientist, but said that he has a problem with climate scientists because, as Watts says, they are using “faulty data.”<br /><br />
Watts should know a thing or two about faulty data, as he was <a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/09/why-the-global-warming-crowd-oversells-its-message.html">recommended to <span class="caps">PBS</span></a> reporter Spencer Michels for an interview by the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-institute-exposed-internal-documents-unmask-heart-climate-denial-machine">disinformation specialists</a> at the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-institute">Heartland Institute</a>.</p>
<p>Here is a brief snip from the <a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/09/why-the-global-warming-crowd-oversells-its-message.html"><span class="caps">PBS</span> Newshour interview</a>:<br /><!--break--></p>
<blockquote>
<span class="caps">SPENCER</span> <span class="caps">MICHELS</span>: What's the thing that bothers you the most about people who say there's lots of global warming?<br /><br /><span class="caps">ANTHONY</span> <span class="caps">WATTS</span>: They want to change policy. They want to apply taxes and these kinds of things may not be the actual solution for making a change to our society.<br /><br /><span class="caps">SPENCER</span> <span class="caps">MICHELS</span>: What are you saying? That they're biased essentially or motivated by something else? What?<br /><br /><span class="caps">ANTHONY</span> <span class="caps">WATTS</span>: There's a term that was used to describe this. It's called noble cause corruption. And actually I was a victim of that at one time, where you're so fervent you're in your belief that you have to do something. You're saving the planet, you're making a difference, you're making things better that you're so focused on this goal of fixing it or changing it that you kind of forget to look along the path to make sure that you haven't missed some things.<br /><br />
I started looking into the idea that weather stations have been slowly encroached upon by urbanization and sighting issues over the last century. Meaning that our urbanization affected the temperature. And this was something that was very clear if you looked at the temperature records. But what wasn't clear is how it affected the trend of temperatures. And so that's been something that I've been investigating. <strong>Anyone who's ever stood next to a building in the summertime at night, a brick building that's been out in the summer sun, you stand next to it at night, you can feel the heat radiating off of it. That's a heat sink effect. And over the last 100 years our country, in fact the world, has changed. We've gone from having mostly a rural agrarian society to one that is more urban and city based and as a result the infrastructure has increased. We've got more freeways, you know more airports, we've got more buildings. Got more streets, all these things. Those are all heat sinks. </strong>During the day, solar insulation hits these objects and these surfaces and it stores heat in these objects. At night it releases that heat. Now if you are measuring temperature in a city that went from having uh maybe 10% of um, non-permeable surface to you know maybe 90% over 100 years, that's a heat sync effect and that should show up in the record. The problem is, is that it's been such a slow subtle change over the last 100 years. It's not easy to detect and that's been the challenge and that's what I've been working on.<br /><br /><span class="caps">SPENCER</span> <span class="caps">MICHELS</span>: Well in a way you're saying that the records aren't accurate, the data isn't accurate.<br /><br /><span class="caps">ANTHONY</span> <span class="caps">WATTS</span>: I'm saying that the data might be biased by these influences to a percentage. <strong>Yes, we have some global warming, it's clear the temperature has gone up in the last 100 years. But what percentage of that is from carbon dioxide? And what percentage of that is from changes in the local and measurement environment?</strong><br />
</blockquote>
<p>There’s really only one way to take Watts’ statements, and that is to infer that he believes climate scientists are fools. For him to be allowed to go on the air and make an unchallenged statement that climate scientists are wrong because they didn’t factor in that buildings and asphalt surfaces retain heat is both infuriating and demeaning.<br /><br />
The concept of heat absorption by different surfaces, colors, and objects is a subject that some <a href="http://www.teachengineering.org/view_activity.php?url=collection/wpi_/activities/wpi_colors_absorb_heat_better/colors_absorb_heat_better.xml">school systems teach to children as young as 6 years old</a> – and yet Watts believes that climate scientists with years and years of education and real-world experience forgot about this elementary school lesson.<br /><br />
The urban heat island theory has been debunked repeatedly, including by the <a href="http://desmogblog.com/urban-heat-island-favorite-skeptic-myth-debunked-again-time-koch-funded-science">Koch-funded <span class="caps">BEST</span> analysis</a>. Despite his March 2011 statement that, “I’m prepared to accept whatever result they produce, even if it proves my premise wrong,” Watts continues to peddle the <a href="http://www.skepticalscience.com/urban-heat-island-effect.htm">urban heat island</a> theory to this day, and continues his attacks on the Koch-funded study in the interview.<br /><br />
But that isn’t the only jab that Watts took at climate scientists:<br /> </p>
<blockquote>
<span class="caps">SPENCER</span> <span class="caps">MICHELS</span>: Has this issue, I know you think it's been oversold and scare tactics have been used. Do you think it's become too politicized?<br /><br /><span class="caps">ANTHONY</span> <span class="caps">WATTS</span>: Oh, it's definitely become too politicized. In fact, some of the scientists who are the leaders in the issue have become for lack of a better word, <strong>political tools on the issue</strong>.<br />
</blockquote>
<p>Again, it is ironic that a man recommended by the Heartland Institute would have the audacity to refer to anyone as a “political tool.”<br /><br />
Ultimately however, the blame for this shoddy piece of “journalism” lies with <span class="caps">PBS</span>. They fell into the trap that says that there are two sides to every story. But that is not always the case, and <a href="http://grist.org/climate-energy/global-warming-debate-needs-less-both-sides-wankery/">it certainly isn’t the case with climate change</a>.<br /><br />
Bill Nye put it best recently <a href="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/07/02/bill-nye-to-cnn-the-two-sides-arent-equal-on-climate-change/">when he told <span class="caps">CNN</span></a>: <em>“I appreciate that we want to show two sides of the stories — there’s a tradition in journalism that goes back quite a ways, I guess — but the two sides aren’t equal here. You have tens of thousands of scientists who are very concerned and you have a few people who are in business of equating or drawing attention to the idea that uncertainty is the same as doubt. When you have a plus or minus percentage, that’s not the same thing as not believing the whole thing at all…</em><em> </em><em>We in the science education community chip away at this problem all the time. We have an enormous population of people in the United States that don’t believe in evolution, the fundamental idea in all of life science. It would be like saying, I don’t believe in earthquakes or something. The analogies are disturbing.”</em><br /><br />
Nye is absolutely right with his analysis of media coverage, and <span class="caps">PBS</span> has now fallen into the same disgraceful journalistic tactics purveyed on Fox News and, as Nye pointed out, on <span class="caps">CNN</span>.<br /><br />
See further reactions to this disturbing development at <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/09/17/863551/false-balance-lives-in-worst-climate-story-of-the-year-pbs-channels-fox-news/">ClimateProgress</a>, <a href="http://getenergysmartnow.com/2012/09/17/pbs-news-hours-public-service-demonstrating-the-shallowness-of-mainstream-modern-american-journalism/">Get Energy Smart Now</a>, and <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/09/18/pbs-newshour-propagates-confusion-on-climate-ch/189966">Media Matters</a>.<br /><br /><strong>Update</strong>: Watch the Newshour segment below:<br /><br /><object height="290" width="550"><param name="movie" value="http://dgjigvacl6ipj.cloudfront.net/media/swf/PBSPlayer.swf" /><param name="flashvars" value="width=550&amp;height=290&amp;video=http://video.pbs.org/videoPlayerInfo/2280519488/?player=PBS_Partner_Player_v1&amp;start=0&amp;end=0&amp;balance=true&amp;player=viral&amp;end=0&amp;lr_admap=in:warnings:0;in:pbs:0" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" bgcolor="#000000" flashvars="width=550&amp;height=290&amp;video=http://video.pbs.org/videoPlayerInfo/2280519488/?player=PBS_Partner_Player_v1&amp;start=0&amp;end=0&amp;balance=true&amp;player=viral&amp;end=0&amp;lr_admap=in:warnings:0;in:pbs:0" height="290" src="http://dgjigvacl6ipj.cloudfront.net/media/swf/PBSPlayer.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="550" wmode="transparent"></embed></object></p>
<p style="font-size:11px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #808080; margin-top: 5px; background: transparent; text-align: center; width: 512px;">Watch <a href="http://video.pbs.org/video/2280519488" style="text-decoration:none !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#4eb2fe !important;" target="_blank">Skeptic No Longer Doubts Human Role in Global Warming</a> on <span class="caps">PBS</span>. See more from <a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/" style="text-decoration:none !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#4eb2fe !important;" target="_blank"><span class="caps">PBS</span> NewsHour.</a></p>
<p><br />
Watch <span class="caps">PBS</span> Newshour's Spencer Michels interviewing Watts below:<br /><object height="309" width="550"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UmIJCGQzCiU?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><embed allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" height="309" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UmIJCGQzCiU?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="550"></embed></object></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10180">PBS</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/939">climate change</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7714">Scientist</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/science">Science</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4799">meteorologist</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4385">watts up with that</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3350">Anthony Watts</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10181">Spencer Michels</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10182">Public Broadcasting</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10183">Bill Nye</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2939">energy</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6325">Study</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5648">Report</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8218">Forecast the Facts</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1399">Media Matters</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10219">ombudsman</a></div></div></div>Tue, 18 Sep 2012 04:04:28 +0000Farron Cousins6524 at http://www.desmogblog.com